True, you don't have to be religious to be crazy, but it helps.

Virtually every major technological advance in the history of the human species- back to the invention of stone tools and the domestication of fire has been ethically ambiguous. If you want to reason about faith, and offer a reasoned (and reason responsive) defense of faith as an extra category of belief worthy of special consideration, I'm eager to play. I certainly grant the existence of the phenomenon of faith; what I want to see is a reasoned ground for taking faith seriously as a way of getting to the truth , and not, say, just as a way people comfort themselves and each other

I should emphasize this, to keep well-meaning but misguided multiculturalists at bay: the theoretical entities in which these tribal people frankly believe — the gods and other spirits — don't exist. These people are mistaken, and you know it as well as I do. It is possible for highly intelligent people to have a very useful but mistaken theory, and we don't have to pretend otherwise in order to show respect for these people and their ways.

Not a single one of the cells that compose you knows who you are, or cares.

I'm the guy who reputedly denies that people experience colors or pains, and thinks that thermostats think — just ask my critics.

What you can imagine depends on what you know.

There is no such thing as philosophy-free science, just science that has been conducted without any consideration of its underlying philosophical assumptions.